Red Okktober wrote:i've never debated with such a pair of fucking idiots as aziz and Murasaki - I'd get more sense out of Ray Charles and Helen Keller after they've each downed a crate of Special Brew.

Guest wrote:When Dorota moved from Poland to England as a nine-year-old child, her mum said their lives would be ‘better’ and she’d make new friends in no time. Dorota did not want to move, or leave her grandparents and friends, but she did not have a choice. The first few years in England were not easy and the family struggled - learning the language, Dorota’s mum had to change jobs often and they moved around a lot. Now, in her late teens, Dorota is getting ready for her exams, with plans to study accountancy at university. She says she feels happy in England and she was planning to stay in the UK, but the Brexit vote had changed everything. In the last year, Dorota was twice attacked, once on a bus, and once at her school.

Dorota is one of the over 1,000 Eastern Europeans aged 12-18 who took part in the first study of this scale carried out by researchers from the universities of Strathclyde, Plymouth and Durham, which is presented at the British Sociological Association’s conference in Newcastle today. Like Dorota, the majority of the young people in the study said they had seen an increase in the incidents of xenophobia and most felt worried and angry about the UK’s decision to leave the European Union. Many felt a sense of rejection, and Brexit has changed their sense of belonging in the UK. Anka, a 14-year-old Lithuanian, said: “I don’t feel as much as a part of England after Brexit as I’m uncertain of the future. However, I don’t feel as a part of Lithuania and I couldn’t go back there.” This in-between-ness was a common feature of young people’s accounts.

Red Okktober wrote:i've never debated with such a pair of fucking idiots as aziz and Murasaki - I'd get more sense out of Ray Charles and Helen Keller after they've each downed a crate of Special Brew.

So in losing the argument you go for the ad hom attack.Classy.

He goes to pieces when people disagree with him.

As soon as the troll aziz rocks up, you completely disregard what's been said before, and go back to square one, claiming because 80,000 or so reports of hate crime were recorded, therefore 80,000 hate crimes actually happened (which would include complaints about Farage).

Are your really so simple and easily led? 'Yes' would appear to be the answer to that.

You seem oblivious to the fact that anyone can pick up the phone and report a hate crime, with zero evidence required. That call will get recorded (as one of the 80,000) and will be investigated by police. How many more times do you have to be told that only 16% of that 80,000+ were deemed suitable enough to go to trial?

Red Okktober wrote:i've never debated with such a pair of fucking idiots as aziz and Murasaki - I'd get more sense out of Ray Charles and Helen Keller after they've each downed a crate of Special Brew.

So in losing the argument you go for the ad hom attack.Classy.

He goes to pieces when people disagree with him.

As soon as the troll aziz rocks up, you completely disregard what's been said before, and go back to square one, claiming because 80,000 or so reports of hate crime were recorded, therefore 80,000 hate crimes actually happened (which would include complaints about Farage).

Are your really so simple and easily led? 'Yes' would appear to be the answer to that.

You seem oblivious to the fact that anyone can pick up the phone and report a hate crime, with zero evidence required. That call will get recorded (as one of the 80,000) and will be investigated by police. How many more times do you have to be told that only 16% of that 80,000+ were deemed suitable enough to go to trial?

It's the typical neo liberal lefty response Red, everything they quote is the stone wall truth, everything quoted by those they don't agree with, no matter how irrefutable, is either a lie or there are a thousand made up reasons as to why they should be a lie.

They've always been short on simple arithmatic skills, yet they can quote percentages 'til they come out their ears when it suits.

Trapper John wrote:It's the typical neo liberal lefty response Red, everything they quote is the stone wall truth, everything quoted by those they don't agree with, no matter how irrefutable, is either a lie or there are a thousand made up reasons as to why they should be a lie.

They've always been short on simple arithmatic skills, yet they can quote percentages 'til they come out their ears when it suits.

Let's test them out and apply their 'a crime is a crime when it gets reported, and not when it get's proven in a court of law' principle across the board, and apply it to other crimes. Let's say murder.

Any one of them is welcome to answer this:

Let's say people reporting murder went up 29% from the previous year. No evidence is required to back up the murder claim - no corpse, no murder weapon, nothing. All they have to do is pick up the phone and simply say there's been a murder.

Trapper John wrote:It's the typical neo liberal lefty response Red, everything they quote is the stone wall truth, everything quoted by those they don't agree with, no matter how irrefutable, is either a lie or there are a thousand made up reasons as to why they should be a lie.

They've always been short on simple arithmatic skills, yet they can quote percentages 'til they come out their ears when it suits.

Let's test them out and apply their 'a crime is a crime when it gets reported, and not when it get's proven in a court of law' principle across the board, and apply it to other crimes. Let's say murder.

Any one of them is welcome to answer this:

Let's say people reporting murder went up 29% from the previous year. No evidence is required to back up the murder claim - no corpse, no murder weapon, nothing. All they have to do is pick up the phone and simply say there's been a murder.

Would the liberal/lefty Brains Trust on here say:

A - There's been a 29% increase in people reporting murder.

or

B - There's been a 29% increase in the number of actual murders.

I think you can get an idea from the near silence we hear over the rise of black on black murders in London. I'm surprised quite honestly that we haven't had anyone (as yet) claim it is mostly white people painting themselves black, then stabbing black people because they are jubilant about Brexit.

Red Okktober wrote:i've never debated with such a pair of fucking idiots as aziz and Murasaki - I'd get more sense out of Ray Charles and Helen Keller after they've each downed a crate of Special Brew.

So in losing the argument you go for the ad hom attack.Classy.

He goes to pieces when people disagree with him.

As soon as the troll aziz rocks up, you completely disregard what's been said before, and go back to square one, claiming because 80,000 or so reports of hate crime were recorded, therefore 80,000 hate crimes actually happened (which would include complaints about Farage).

Are your really so simple and easily led? 'Yes' would appear to be the answer to that.

You seem oblivious to the fact that anyone can pick up the phone and report a hate crime, with zero evidence required. That call will get recorded (as one of the 80,000) and will be investigated by police. How many more times do you have to be told that only 16% of that 80,000+ were deemed suitable enough to go to trial?

You don’t get to decide what constitutes a hate crime. Obviously they won’t all go to court Hatred was stirred up during the Brexit debacle campaign. Hatred and fear of foreigners due to immigration and the mass migration issue. Which miraculously left our tv screens soon after the vote.There’s never been a proper debate on immigration so certain campaigners played on voters fears/concerns and some people reacted by being openly hateful, hence the rise in reports to police. Thankfully they didn’t all result in stabbings, except that female MP one.

Red Okktober wrote:i've never debated with such a pair of fucking idiots as aziz and Murasaki - I'd get more sense out of Ray Charles and Helen Keller after they've each downed a crate of Special Brew.

So in losing the argument you go for the ad hom attack.Classy.

He goes to pieces when people disagree with him.

As soon as the troll aziz rocks up, you completely disregard what's been said before, and go back to square one, claiming because 80,000 or so reports of hate crime were recorded, therefore 80,000 hate crimes actually happened (which would include complaints about Farage).

Are your really so simple and easily led? 'Yes' would appear to be the answer to that.

You seem oblivious to the fact that anyone can pick up the phone and report a hate crime, with zero evidence required. That call will get recorded (as one of the 80,000) and will be investigated by police. How many more times do you have to be told that only 16% of that 80,000+ were deemed suitable enough to go to trial?

You don’t get to decide what constitutes a hate crime. Obviously, they won’t all go to court Hatred was stirred up during the Brexit debacle campaign. Hatred and fear of foreigners due to immigration and the mass migration issue. Which miraculously left our tv screens soon after the vote.There’s never been a proper debate on immigration so certain campaigners played on voters fears/concerns and some people reacted by being openly hateful, hence the rise in reports to police. Thankfully they didn’t all result in stabbings, except that female MP one.

It was stated that the scum newspaper over reported hate crimes concerning Brexit. But being Labourites favourite reading they would believe it. Just pointing it out to set the record straight.

It's just another load of Bollacks.2016/2017 80.000 plus hate crimes were reported and recorded. out of that 14 plus Percent were proven to be an actual hate crime. This is a small percentage drop against previous years. As I said another load of Bollocks Jazzed up by a prat like you. Mcarse. The majority were not actually proven to be hate crimes. Just reported as such.